yes
One of the biggest factors was infrastructure. The north had most of the manufacturing facilities while the south was mostly agricultural. Had the south bolstered their ability to manufacture wartime goods before the split they may have had a better chance. This is however just one of many factors. The south was doomed in that they didn't have as large or well trained navy, less diplomatic ties, and few allies.
The human cost of the US Civil War was a heavy toll. On a percentage basis, the South lost approximately 20% of its military forces. For the Union, the percentage loss was about 16%. It would seem that because the Union forces were mostly on the offensive and the South on the defensive side of battles, that in pure numbers, the North may have lost more troops. One historian counts a total of 665,000 soldiers killed in total. Other's place the number smaller. None, however, has approximated the deaths below 600,000 men killed in total.
After the Civil War, a plantation owner in the North may have faced financial difficulties due to the end of slavery and the restructuring of the agricultural economy. Some may have transitioned their operations to other crops or diversified their investments. Others may have sold their land or moved to different regions in pursuit of new opportunities.
It is likely that the Dred Scott decision had little direct effect on the Civil War. However, it is may be that the South felt more justified to pursue the war because of the decision.
They pointed out that the North's textile industry depended on southern cotton Well, they didn't really. Northern states didn't really have slavery much at all. Though they did want more political and military power than the south, so they started the civil war. The civil war actually really wasn't just all about freeing the slaves. Actually, freeing the slaves may have been the last thing on their minds.
President Hayes kept removes troops from the South. The order was given on May 1st, 1877. The decision to end Reconstruction and return the rule to Southerners, soon resulted in the disenfranchisement of the Blacks in the South.
North South - 2011 was released on: USA: May 2011
They didn't really. If they had they may have thought twice before they attacked. If you look at the data they didn't have the resources needed to win, but part of the problem I don't think the south or north thought the war would last so long or so bloody.
Ideas and suggestions.During this era constuction was important for change and violence threatend this reconstruction of change in which was important to the state for its fight for peace. You may find more details in wikipedia.com type in reconstruction era or civil rights and you may find more concreat details of this question.
President Ruthford Hayes, nineteenth president, kept his campaign promise to remove federal troops from the South, ending the period known as Reconstruction. The order was given on May 1st, 1877. The decision to end Reconstruction and return the rule to Southerners, soon resulted in the partial disenfranchisement of the Blacks in the South.
Eleven States: Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas
This may be the Civil War because of the fact that the South wanted independence from the North. They wanted to form an independent Confederacy. The North tried to prevent them from seceding, and eventually led to the Civil War.
9 different battles
Answer this question… Post-Civil War racial discrimination in the South African American communities growing in cities in the North
The northern people wanted the south to be reconstructed and returned to the Union as soon as possible, for the most part. But many wanted to see the south suffer as much as possible. The south was destroyed, and many innocent people were left destitute. Wiser heads prevailed in Washington, because the north knew that dealing too harshly with the defeated south could cause another war in less than a generation, and the country may be destroyed this time.
Actually reconstruction ended with the election of Hayes in 1877. The election was a tie and Hayes made a deal with the committee who decided the presidency. The deal was he would end reconstruction and this decision actually affected policy for the next 100 years. By ending reconstruction early the southern states were able to institute Jim Crow Laws which made discrimination an government policy. Without the early end to reconstruction the south may have been a different place and it took the 1964 Civil Rights act to overcome Jim Crow.
The question is vague as it asks about the "following" and provides no items to discuss. However, be that as it may, we can explore what were disadvantages of the South when & during the Civil War. The South's disadvantages were: A. Smaller pool of men to fuel the army, as the North had a significantly larger population; B. No formal army existed in the South at the beginning of the war. The North's army was only 16,000 men but it was more than the South's; C. The South had no manufacturing base to supply arms & ammunition and other products the Union army needed. The South had to play catch -up in creating factories; and D. The South had no navy to protect its ports, it had to create one quickly but the North already had large shipyards to build warships.